Guidelines
I have established this blog as a means of transparency to the public, outreach to the community, and information dissemination to all who choose to look. Feedback is welcome, but because public participation is equally encouraged, appropriate language and decorum is mandatory.
Showing posts with label fee simple title. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fee simple title. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 19, 2018
A Disastrous Deal for Taxpayers: The Beach Club Lease Renewal of January, 2018
The 128 unit Beach Club condominium complex at Pensacola Beach recently renegotiated their lease with the Santa Rosa Island Authority.
The original 1949 lease had been amended in 1985 (but this amendment was not recorded) and it was amended again in 1985 a second time (recorded). The original lease was set to expire in 2048--but instead the Island Authority renegotiated this renewal, ahead of schedule and on VERY favorable terms for Beach Club. This happened in 2017 and the parties signed a new amendment in January of 2018--starting the clock on a brand new 99 year lease.
Because of the changes made to this renewal that was just completed and finalized this year--the properties on this land will only pay ad valorem taxes on improvements, not on the land. The property's owners will pay a lease fee to the SRIA.
This lease fee, according to the property appraiser, is a total of $23,593.78 yearly----- or just $184.33 per unit per year!!
This amount of a lease fee for such a valuable piece of Gulf-front property is ridiculously low, so much so that I feel it is borderline scandalous. Why was this rate negotiated down to such a small amount? Who decided this was appropriate? Why are the taxpayers that own this land being treated so unfairly in this deal? These are questions I am asking and that I will continue to ask until I get a good answer. So far I have received no good answers. (Similarly priced condominiums on the Gulf of Mexico in Perdido Key pay in excess of $4000 MORE yearly in taxes and fees as do the 128 owners of Beach Club now as a result of this "re negotiation.")
Meanwhile, a quick look at section VI of the second amendment to the original Beach Club lease, signed in 1985, clearly states that the minimum rent [lease fee] will be $25,000.00 or $500.00 per unit per year, whichever is greater.[EMPHASIS ADDED] So why is the lease fee only $184.33 per unit 20 years later in 2018 when the minimum per unit 20 years ago was $500 per unit? Why?
This same section, section VI, goes on to state that the rental amounts will be tied to the "CPI, 1967,
Monday, December 17, 2018
Unpacking the Beach Lease Mess Part II: Fixing the Problem Going Forward
![]() |
Although we may not be able to fix some very bad deals (For Escambia County) that were negotiated in the past, we MUST reform the re negotiation process going forward. This MUST happen. |
As I've discussed at the last meeting, and as I
discussed here, here, and here--there is a massive problem with the way several
recent "re-negotiations" have been handled at Pensacola Beach.
Several have and/or will lead to a staggering loss of
revenue for the taxpayers going forward.
Some are questioning now whether the most egregious of
these renewals can or should be "unwound" because the terms are
so destructive to the taxpayers that own these properties.
We
shall see how that unfolds....
Meanwhile, we must fix the problem going forward, we
MUST prevent this abuse of the taxpayer from EVER happening again in the
future. I have put together a simple, multi-step plan that I believe will
solve the problem, make things right, and address this issue going
forward. It goes like this:
--Establish a moratorium on ANY more large condo lease
renewals by SRIA and without BCC authorization until a standard process and
standardized lease models/templates can be put into place with the SRIA.
1 --No
renewals of any existing “Master Leases” ever.
2 -- No
leaseholder shall be compelled to renegotiate any executed, lawful lease prior
to expiration UNLESS such a leaseholder makes the affirmative choice to do
this. (in other words, if the status quo
of your lease is to your satisfaction, you do not have to make any changes to
what you are paying now-if you want to renegotiate early—you can)
3 --Homestead
property that currently carries a perpetually renewing lease and pays full ad
valorem
Sunday, December 16, 2018
Unpacking the Beach Lease Mess Part I: Who Owns the Beach?
Last week the BCC had a good discussion on the various problems with the leases on Pensacola Beach. For those that are interested, the video of that discussion is here.
The problem with any discussion about leases, lease fees, and taxes--is that other issues get brought into the discussion to conflate the underlying topic....then the discussion devolves among those various "camps" of folks that have differing agendas. Beach Lease Holders that pay full ad valorem taxes on improvements and land+ Lease fees, Condo Owners that pay ad valorem taxes just on the improvements and not the land + Lease fees, The property appraiser, The SRIA, the Escambia Board of County Commissioners, Activists that want to prevent fee-simple title from ever being granted to private parties for any part of this land, and last but not least, the Lawyers on both sides of the issue who make lots of money fighting over valuations of appraisals and other aspects of the leases and taxation.
For my part--I simply want equity by and between lease holders going forward. I do not want to re-litigate the past, nor do I want to discuss the distinctions between fee-simple title and leases.
![]() |
Should million dollar condos on the Gulf at Pensacola Beach pay about half the amount of taxes and fees of what million dollar condos on the Gulf in Perdido Key pay? |
In short, I simply want to insure that a "Beach Club" type lease renewal NEVER again happens to the taxpayers.
So let's just boil it down and start with the basics, and work our way down to what matters, and to do this we will ask some rhetorical questions. (then I'll provide answers that are my opinions and what I believe to be true with supporting facts, however I am open to any dissenting opinions)
1. Who is the lawful OWNER of ALL the property that was deeded to Escambia County via the 1946 Public Act of Congress and subsequent 1947 Conveyance granted to Escambia County---including those portions that currently lie in Santa Rosa County?
Answer: The Citizens of Escambia County and NOBODY ELSE! (But multiple, subsequent sub- leases of various portions of this land have been made by Escambia to Santa Rosa County, and to private parties in Escambia County. And multiple leases have been made between Santa Rosa County and private parties on the portions of properties leased to Santa Rosa County that lie in Santa Rosa County)
2. Was it, and is it, legal for Escambia County to enter into leases, including leases that are perpetually renewing, for portions of this one large property that was given to Escambia County by the Federal Government in 1947?
Answer: Yes--(otherwise someone would have challenged the underlying legality of the granting of these initial and subsequent leases in court at some point--or the courts would have at some point weighed-in on this question and invalidated these leases at some point over the course of one of the court's multiple "cracks" at this question during litigation over the last 5 decades on various aspects of beach leases.....)
3. Is there a distinction to be made between Ownership of Beach Land under Land Title Law and Equitable Ownership of the same Beach Land for Tax Purposes under the Law?
Answer: YES--1000% yes (More than half of the leases made by Escambia County to various
Monday, November 26, 2018
The Return of Fee Simple??
![]() |
Some folks want us to start the fee simple battle all over again........ |
The PNJ has a story out on the electronic edition today about the return of the fee simple bill that would allow for private ownership of leased properties at Pensacola Beach.
The Escambia Board of County Commissioners has taken a 5-0 vote to adopt a position on this topic of "no position."
We also passed a preservation ordinance that was the result of a lot of discussions, compromises, and gnashing of teeth.
We then put a non-binding referendum on the ballot-- just a few weeks back--- that passed by an overwhelming majority of Escambia Citizens.
So no, I do not think the fee simple bill is coming back. That's my guess, that's my observation.
I'm told that Santa Rosa County is pushing hard for a return to the fee simple bill so that property owners in Navarre Beach can get fee simple title to their properties out there.
I don't know how that happens if step one is getting Escambia County to agree. This will be an interesting conversation going forward.
For my part, I just want to see us get to a point where the lease structure is more equitable for current leaseholders out on the beach, I want to make sure no more condo complexes get the sweetheart renewal deal the Beach Club recently negotiated (to the detriment of Escambia County as the owner
Monday, June 18, 2018
Constituent Request (s) and My Answer: Let the People Weigh-In and Vote
For the last 6 months we have been lobbied to add a referendum to our ballot regarding Pensacola Beach-specifically the question about public or private ownership of the beach. Our meetings have been flooded with requests that we let the people weigh-in on this request at the ballot box. I have met with this group individually in my office, and I have heard them speak at the meeting (s). Last Wednesday, I received this email....
This, below, is the language that we will discuss this Thursday. I have no idea the appetite my counterparts will have for this--but at least we will have it on the table for, hopefully, an up or down vote one way or the other on the question of whether or not we want to add this to the ballot and let the citizens weigh-in on this topic.
Wednesday, May 30, 2018
Beach Breakthrough?
After months and months of discussions and back and forth arguing--there is the potential for an agreement on preserving the public areas of the beach and keeping them public--precluding future leases in areas that are currently public, etc.
Commissioner Robinson has put forth several proposals in an attempt to compromise with folks who prefer to have a ballot initiative.
The frustrating thing for me to watch is the fact that I think both parties want the same thing--open areas of the beach to be preserved for the use and enjoyment of the public.
The draft resolution, below, may just do the trick. The full BCC will have to weigh-in--but this could be it, this could be the "Beach Breakthrough" we have all been waiting for
We shall see......
Commissioner Robinson has put forth several proposals in an attempt to compromise with folks who prefer to have a ballot initiative.
The frustrating thing for me to watch is the fact that I think both parties want the same thing--open areas of the beach to be preserved for the use and enjoyment of the public.
The draft resolution, below, may just do the trick. The full BCC will have to weigh-in--but this could be it, this could be the "Beach Breakthrough" we have all been waiting for
We shall see......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)